Татьяна (Andrássy Tatjana) (unbelievableme) wrote in euro_royals,
Татьяна (Andrássy Tatjana)

Слово "Royal" в названии благотворительных организаций не приносит особой выгоды

Royal patronages-02

Благотворительные организации, в которых члены БКС выступают в роли покровителей, не получают от этого особой финансовой выгоды © The Times *

Royal patronages-01

"Наличие члена королевской семьи в качестве покровителя является, пожалуй, самым желанным призом для сотен благотворительных организаций Британского Содружества. Но, как выяснилось в исследовании, помимо поднятия настроения и украшения официальных бланков и веб-сайтов королевским вензелем, роялсы-покровители не приносят ощутимого увеличения доходов благотворительной организации.

Британские учёные исследователи изучили доходы благотворительных организаций до и после того, как они обрели роялс-покровителей, и сравнили их с доходами аналогичных благотворительных организаций без заветного слова "Royal" в наименовании, но не нашли признаков увеличения благотворительных взносов в случае первых.

"Из имеющихся данных мы делаем заключение, что влияние королевских покровителей на доходы благотворительных организаций мало или равно нулю", - заключили британские исследователи. Таким образом, "благотворительные организациям не следует искать королевских покровителей, рассчитывая, что такие покровители автоматически увеличат приток благотворительных денег".

Royal patronages-03
* Для прочтения полного текста статьи, The Times требует подписку, которой у меня нет.
Краткий пересказ статьи размещён в Твиттере.
На мой взгляд, пристрастной и нелепой является сама идея "британских учёных"™ измерить участие членов БКС в благотворительных проектах исключительно в денежных единицах, исключая духовное и идеологическое влияние на общество.

[Оригинальный текст статьи The Times + инфографика]
Having a member of the royal family as patron is perhaps the most sought-after prize for a charity. But beyond lifting spirits and gracing its headed notepaper and website, a royal patron brings no discernible boost to a charity’s income, a study has found.

Researchers looked at the revenue of charities before and after they appointed royals as patrons and compared these to those of similar charities but found no consistent pattern. “From the data available we suspect that the effect of royal patrons on charities’ revenue is small or zero,” they concluded. They said that “charities should not seek or retain royal patrons thinking that they will bring the charity money”.

The study by Giving Evidence, a charity consultancy, told charities hoping for a flurry of royal engagements and prestigious events in palaces to lower their expectations.
Of 1,187 charities registered in the United Kingdom with a royal patron, three quarters had no public engagements at all with them listed in the Court Circular last year. One in seven had one visit or event and only a much smaller number had three or more events. It did not look at private events, for which data was not available.

The study described an uneven geographical spread of charities with royal patrons and suggested that convenience may be a factor, with chosen charities more likely to be within easy travelling distance of palaces and residences in London and the southwest, southeast and east England.
This picture of uneven interest was highlighted by charities founded by members of the royal family themselves, to which they devoted far more attention. Despite comprising just 2 per cent of charities with a royal patron, these received 317 official visits or events last year, more than a third of royal engagements with charities.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s Royal Foundation had the most, with 80 engagements listed in the Court Circular, followed by the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award (62) and its International Award Foundation (56), and two of the Prince of Wales’s charities, the Prince’s Foundation (36) and the Prince’s Trust (22)
The report acknowledged that royal patronage may bring other benefits, but that the research could only quantify those that can be measured. It also found exceptions, notably the Princess Royal who in the past three years fulfilled 42 engagements with Save the Children, of which she was president from 1970 and replaced the Queen as patron in 2016.

The researchers examined children’s hospices, universities, air ambulances, nursing homes and housing charities to see if those with a royal patron increased revenue after such an appointment or outperformed those without. The study concluded that income data showed that “nothing much happens to their revenue when a patronage starts”.

Sir Stephen Bubb, director of the Oxford Institute of Charity, said: “This is interesting because it debunks the idea that you get a royal and the money flows in because of the cachet. That has always been a bit questionable. But there are intangible benefits of a royal patronage. If you get a visit it is morale-raising for the staff and the volunteers and the beneficiaries.”

Ever since George II became patron of the Society of Antiquaries in 1751 the royal family have been involved in charities. The way they do that has changed radically, though (Valentine Low writes).

The Prince of Wales changed the template when he set up the Prince’s Trust in 1976 to help vulnerable young people. It is now Britain’s leading youth charity.

The younger generation changed things again. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, not wanting to be mere ribbon-cutters, work with fewer charities, sometimes just to help with a particular project.

More than half the charities that have a single royal patron have the Queen, Prince Charles or the Princess Royal, who have 532 between them.

In contrast, the Duke of Cambridge has 12, his wife nine and the Duke of Sussex eight.


За полный текст статьи благодарю внимательных админов в лице уважаемой Юлии khalivopuloy!
Tags: Королевская семья Британии, СМИ

Recent Posts from This Community

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

Интересно, конечно, молодое поколение решило типа сосредоточиться на небольшом количестве, чтоб ленточки не резать. Почему-то при этом даже с куцей дюжиной годами свои патронаты не навещают.

Что с Андрюшиными-то делать будут?

Recent Posts from This Community